A little more than a week after journalists at Southern Weekly, one of China’s most daring newspapers, clashed with propaganda authorities in southern China’s Guangdong province over alleged censorship of a New Year’s editorial, China watchers are still trying to suss out what the conflict — which inspired anti-censorship protests both online and in the streets — means for the future of media in China.

While not shocked by the Southern Weekly journalists’ conflict with propaganda officials, Ms. Zhu described the secondary protests it inspired as a sign of “real progress” in Chinese society. Edited excerpts:

How surprised were you by the reaction of the Southern Weekly journalists?

Not all that surprised, as this is certainly not the first time Southern Weekly has had its run in with the censors. The paper has lived up to its prized rebel reputation. Emboldened by the paper’s popularity with the public and an increasingly transparent media environment fueled by the Internet, the journalists there simply exploded—enough is enough.

What about the reaction of others outside the newspaper — the protesters calling for freedom of speech and the more subtle expressions of support from other news organizations and websites?

That is the real story of the standoff— the popular support displayed in a very public manner against media censorship! The most exciting part of the entire episode is not about journalists vs. the censors but about the public backlash against censorship! I’m thrilled to see the light at the end of the tunnel. A baby step perhaps, but a milestone never the less, an earthshaking moment in the building of a civil society.

Public demonstrations of varying scale have been a regular fixture on Chinese streets in recent years, but never before has the public expressed an outcry for concerns beyond immediate bread and butter issues. This is real progress, moving from the basic physical needs to social and creative needs. And were it not so wrapped up in its own outmoded and regressive insistence on control, the Chinese state could actually take credit for years of economic reform that have given rise to a Chinese middle class that now demands more than just food on the table—they want food for thought! Samuel Huntington might have a point that economic development produces rapid social change, which leads to mass political demands that challenge the status quo, but I hope that the Chinese state will not follow up with Huntington’s prescription to use force to address political concerns.

The journalists at Southern Weekly say they were angry at Guangdong provincial propaganda chief Tuo Zhen for instituting a system of pre-publication censorship. How does traditional media censorship usually work? Is pre-publication interference really so rare?

Make no mistake that state media continues to be on the censor’s short leash, although the intensity of control varies from paper to paper. State-owned or subsidized publications must follow a standard approval procedure from production to publication.

But marketization has changed China’s media dynamic. The needs of the public and the state frequently clash (though the state would like for you to believe that it acts in the best interest of the public) and the market has functioned as a liberating force in nudging journalists towards attending to popular sentiment, thereby mitigating the state’s draconian control.

The city of Guangzhou’s pro-commerce atmosphere provided fertile ground for Southern Weekly to be bold.

In practice, journalists have the incentive to dodge the tall orders of censorship, and thus there are frequent transgressions, albeit mostly within the boundaries of what is permissible. In the case of the Southern Weekend, the censor remains vigilant partly because the paper is popular among the public, which makes the state extremely anxious.

The New Press

There’s an impression among some in the West that Chinese journalists are docile mice who serve the interests of the government and the Communist Party. How many Chinese journalists do you think share the frustrations and ideals of the reporters and editors at Southern Weekly?

I believe that many journalists in China would tell you that there is no difference in journalistic values and ethics between East and West. Like in the West, journalists in China too want their media to function as the “fourth estate” or the “conscience of society/people/public.”

I am offended by the view that there is something intrinsically timid about Chinese culture that prevents a vigorous press from surfacing and functioning. I don’t buy the notion that the Chinese journalists are not capable of performing to par. The brief moment of open and candid earthquake coverage in 2008 is a case in point. As I recounted in “Two Billion Eyes,” when left to follow their professional instincts, Chinese journalists are capable of performing their civic duty in the highest journalistic standard.

Southern Weekly has a long tradition of pushing the boundaries, getting punished, and then coming back to push again. How is it that the paper has managed to stay so daring for so long?

It’s cultural and geographical proximity to Hong Kong has certainly played a part in Southern Weekly’s more liberal outlook. It’s useful to remember, though, that Southern Weekly is in the business of selling papers, so not everything it does is about citizen rights and freedom of speech. The financial bottom line is frequently a concern as well.

How does the explosion of social media play into the way the government handles traditional media?

The censor’s hands are very much forced by the rapid and unfiltered information flow on social media, which explains their clumsy overreaction. The interference from the provincial Propaganda Department was in reality “much ado about nothing.” Southern Weekly’s New Year’s editorial extolling adherence to the constitution as the new Chinese dream was not out of the bounds to begin with. After all, Xi Jinping himself after he was anointed emphasized the importance of the constitution.

The morphing of a New Year’s editorial from yearning for a constitutional dream to praising the party is outrageously idiotic — a reminder of how moribund the Chinese censorship regime is. I lampooned the system at a recent “Google/Youtube Author Talk,” arguing that hyperactive censorship has become the worst hindrance to China’s own global soft-power campaign. After the Southern Weekly standoff, even the People’s Daily lamented how “the local propaganda chiefs are ruining the central government’s image.”

How would you characterize Chinese journalists in the current era in terms of their willingness to take on propaganda authorities?

It’s a delicate dance. They are getting increasingly bold but do have to exercise self-protection.

What changes, if any, do you expect the new Chinese leadership to make to the way media is managed in the country?

The paternalistic state will have to find a smarter way to exercise control. It will need to learn to trust and empower its own people.

Thought crime no longer sits well with an enlightened public. Censorship cannot eliminate dissent–it will only ferment further discontent, as coercion would eventually lead to rebellion.

Can you envision a scenario in which the Communist Party would significantly loosen its grip on the media?

That day will come only when the party is willing to cede its monopolistic control of politics, economics, and culture.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement and by copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit www.djreprints.com.